ArticleMethodsX2025
TARGETFLOW:An automated literature mining pipeline for accelerating the discovery of high-potential targets in rare and mature diseases.
Article in MethodsX, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To expedite the early stages of drug development for diseases lacking established target databases, and to enhance knowledge updating in well-studied disease domains, this paper introduces TARGETFLOW, an automated literature-mining pipeline. The workflow begins by automatically retrieving literature, downloading relevant abstracts, and constructing a comprehensive database. After performing selective text cleaning and data preprocessing, it leverages large language models (LLMs) to conduct intelligent literature screening, followed by code-based whitespace tokenization. Subsequently, rule-based filtering is applied to extract high-potential therapeutic targets for the specified disease. To validate the effectiveness of this pipeline, three hypotheses were formulated: (1) An effective pipeline should be capable of identifying high-potential therapeutic targets for the given disease; (2) For diseases with established target databases, the pipeline should be able to detect novel and emerging targets not yet included in existing databases; and (3) The pipeline should also be applicable to rare or emerging diseases that lack mature target databases. Then, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a common disease, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), a rare disease, were selected as case studies. The results demonstrated the method's reliability (high-potential target validation rate: 56 %), innovativeness (new target validation pass rate: 100 %), and generalizability (IPF target literature support rate: 88.9 %).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.